[Phil_the_Author]

I am of the opinion that one of the ways that an architect can create a course that can neutralize the advantages that the big hitters have is by creating smaller fairway areas with flat surface. These should be primarily in the locations on holes that provide the optimum shot angles into the greens.

I am talking about creating ground that rolls gently and creates areas where stances become less than desirable and that will take a drive that, long or short, has not been played to the holes proper design, will force the player to have to make shots.

Short grass should not necessarily mean a prefered lie.

Is this feasable and at least a partial answer to technology?

[wsmorrison]

Why should length be neutralized?  Isn't length a manifest of skill?    If so, skill should not be neutralized.  Not all long-hitters are huge physical specimens.  Are you saying the playing field should be leveled for all hitters?  Why?  

If length isn't used strategically, then it should be punished but not neutralized.

[Tom_Doak]

Phil:

By the same token, I think sometimes the flatter areas should be in the place with a WORSE angle into the green, so the player is faced with a choice of evils.

[wsmorrison]

Why shouldn't length be rewarded?  The ability to do something extraordinary is a strong appeal to the sport (see Tiger ratings) and a foundation of our culture.  I think high class play based on each individual's skill set (mind and body) is what should be rewarded.  

Do you think Tom Paul was unable to compete in state tournaments because he was 30-50 yards shorter than his competition?  He was able to do so because he made the best of his own skills (straight hitting, short game and strategy).  If I was an inherent short hitter, I'd hone the skills I could and go with that.  Being a long and inconsistant hitter, it is incumbent upon me to become more consistant (hopefully good rather than bad).

Golf isn't like boxing where you have weight classes.  Is it reasonable to suggest lightweight hitter divisions and heavyweight hitter divisions in golf?  Of course not.  

Hitting the ball far is a skill that is part of the sport and should not be constrained at all except by balls and implements, which apply exactly the same to all golfers.  Granted the way the ball reacts to different swing speeds is not so simple, but you get the concept I'm trying to put forth.  Hitting the ball to the ideal location for an approach is a mental/strategic test and is variable depending upon length, trajectory, shape of shot, etc.

[Adam Clayman]

Phrases such as "forcing the player to hit" just doesn't ring true, as it relates to quality gca.

Even Pebble, with it's small greens doesn't dictate the shot shape, or length.

Ballyneal, is the type of design that will benefit the player who either finds the most desirable approach distance and/or angle, inorder to ease the approach shot, but with the green contours, still requires further precision.

For me, the firmness of the turf aids more in the unpredictable difficulties, than some lie or stance issue.

[Scott Witter]

Philip:

I think the precision you seem to be describing may be a bit over the top and unnecessary...and  does'nt the work of C&C, Doak, Devries, Kidd, etc., with these great natural sites essentially accomplish what you are looking for, but in a more 'natural' manner without focus to any one group or type of skill level?

I can understand your objective, but the length issue I believe is not always the deciding factor in just reward and the works of those mentioned above and many other architects, is and as it should be, is also based highly on accuracy and length in combination.  In many cases, length is not the priority and can take a back seat to accuracy, considering when characteristics and features at the green site & putting surface are what is really influencing the position in the short grass.

I also think as you might try to achieve what you describe that you would create added difficulty for the average player...shouldn't they also have this "flat surface" you note located somewhere in their optimum landing area?

[wsmorrison]

"By the same token, I think sometimes the flatter areas should be in the place with a WORSE angle into the green, so the player is faced with a choice of evils."

I think that is a great concept.

Sean,

Yes, short par 3s and certain short par 4s decrease the importance of length and increase the importance of accuracy.  There should be one or more of these kinds of holes on every golf course.

[Phil_the_Author]

The reason I asked this question is because I had a recent conversation with someone who asked me why Links courses have fairways that always seem to go every which way and have very little flat areas where one can take a "proper stance."

Obviously the closest this person has ever been to a links course is watching the Open on TV, yet his perspective I found interesting, that fairways are areas that should always be flat.

Sean, I am not, "advocating the player having to choose distance OR lie/stance with the added proviso that superior distance can lead to a decent lie as well..." nor am I suggesting that, "length be neutralized?  Isn't length a manifest of skill?    If so, skill should not be neutralized." Wayne.

Rather I am wondering how often fairway contours are planned with the idea of designed shot value intent being encouraged? Consider how almost all announcers of PGA Tour events talk about how the player got his shot onto the "short grass." When was the last time you heard them say that the player put his shot into the right spot?

Growing up in the 50's & 60's I was introduced to TV golf through early Masters where it was drummed into me that the golf course was designed to be played in a proper fashion. The thinking player would NEVER play for the elft side of 11 green or go directly at a pin located on the right side of the 13th green.

Nowadays the game on the professional level has devolved into one where hitting it as far as you can is the first thought process, because if one is going to be in the rough closer to the green is better. No concern seems to be shown for the proper angle in since most of these shots are being played with short irons that can stop the ball at all times.

Tom, I agree with your comment of, "By the same token, I think sometimes the flatter areas should be in the place with a WORSE angle into the green, so the player is faced with a choice of evils." It is this choice that doesn't seem to be making it into the majority of designs today (IMHO).

I just think that fairways should be shaped in a manner where the right play is rewarded and the wrong choice isn't. To clarify, I am not saying punished, just not rewarded. It is seeing or learning how a hole gives clear cut advantages for proper play that allows one to appreciate the design.

[Doug Siebert]

If an architect pursues this strategy, he'd better pursue it in the rough also, otherwise players may figure that if the fairway is effectively only 10 yards wide, they should just pound it out there as far as possible and figure a shorter club in the rough is better.  Moreso if the hole is a short iron approach anyway.

I don't know if this is true for tour pros, but for me I'd much rather hit a wedge out of some pretty thick rough than hit a wedge from a fairway with the ball 4-5" below my feet.  I can handle the ball above my feet lie just fine, but short irons with the ball below my feet give me fits, I'll usually take a couple clubs extra and hit a 3/4 shot rather than trying to bend and spread far enough to catch the ball solid (and just hope the heel doesn't catch earth first.....that does wonders for a shot's direction, let me tell you!)

One thing I think would be interesting would be to test distance control with a driver.  These days everyone just bangs away for as much distance as possible or "just enough" (to clear the bunker, dogleg, uneven ground, wahtever)  Have some flat spots for about 10 yards, then 10 yards of funky lies for a large section of fairway.  The guys who can hit it 320 but can back off to 305 can do so, those who can't would have to less club to find something they can control the distance of.  It could be used closer to the green on long par 5s so those who want to layup close need to control the distance, but you can have a large safe flat area if you hang back to the 150 marker.

I guess the only way something like what I'm describing would be done would be if all the land was ripply and you just flattened out certain sections of it.  Would seem a shame to mess with such perfect land.  The other alternative, adding ripples to flat land, sounds like it could get expensive quick.

[Mike_Young]

If one builds a level fairway expect it to remain wet.....

[Scott Witter]

Mike:

You are really one sharp pencil, whew! I wasn't sure if anyone was going to catch us...thanks for keeping us creative guys on our toes!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()